Workflow Resource Patterns: Identification, Representation and Tool Support

Abstract

In the main, the attention of workflow researchers and workflow developers has focussed on the process perspective, i.e., control-flow. As a result, issues associated with the resource perspective, i.e., the people and machines actually doing the work, have been largely neglected. Although the process perspective is of most significance, appropriate consideration of the resource perspective is essential for successful implementation of workflow technology. Previous work has identified recurring, generic constructs in the control-flow and data perspectives, and presented them in the form of control-flow and data patterns. The next logical step is to describe workflow resource patterns that capture the various ways in which resources are represented and utilised in workflows. These patterns include a number of distinct groupings such as push patterns ("the system pushes work to a worker") and pull patterns ("the worker pulls work from the system") to describe the many ways in which work can be distributed. By delineating these patterns in a form that is independent of specific workflow technologies and modelling languages, we are able to provide a comprehensive treatment of the resource perspective and we subsequently use these patterns as the basis for a detailed comparison of a number of commercially available workflow management systems.

A template-based approach for responsibility management in executable business processes

“…The outcome is a resource-aware process model . The set of conditions that can be defined depicts the expressiveness of the language and is usually evaluated with a subset of the well-known workflow resource patterns (Russell et al 2005), namely, the creation patterns, which include, among others: Direct, Organisational, Role-Based , and Capability-Based Distribution , or the ability to specify the identity, position, role or capabilities of the resource that will take part in a task, respectively; (SoD) , or the ability to specify that two tasks must be allocated to different resources in a given process instance; and Retain Familiar (also known as Binding of Duties (BoD)) , or the ability to allocate an activity instance within a given process instance to the same resource that performed a preceding activity instance. A comparison of resource assignment languages can be found in Cabanillas et al (2015b).…”

“…Therefore, they allow grouping process activities according to any criterion, which includes organisational information. Besides that, this modelling approach is very little expressive in terms of the support provided for the creation patterns (Russell et al 2005). There is no notion of responsibility modelling either.…”

“…Resource Assignment Language (RAL) (Cabanillas et al 2015b; Cabanillas, Resinas, and Ruiz-Cortés 2011a) is an expressive language for defining resource assignments that supports all the creation patterns (Russell et al 2005). RAL is independent of the process modelling notation.…”

Applying Enterprise Architecture to Business Networks

“…Various approaches to resource definition and work distribution, focused mostly in the context of single organizational business processes, have been proposed, (e.g. [Russell et al, 2005] This requirement addresses the capacity, innovation, and new opportunities available through business networks of the case organizations and their "third parties" to extend the capabilities of existing artifacts, diversifying their value. The core capabilities associated with the artifact are retained, not displaced, even if a new artifact is produced.…”

“…This involves the definition of novations constraints in the context of resources that can fulfill roles where resources have specific competencies. Table 4.6 shows the outcome of the analysis of applicability of workflow resource patterns developed by [Russell et al, 2005] in business networks and their corresponding novation constraints. …”